Nephilim17
-
Posts
1,698 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Nephilim17
-
-
1 hour ago, bigduke6 said:
Josh still in his prime, team is about as good as its going to get. now is the time. you want a Super Bowl? you need to win now. do what it takes to grab one of the top 3 receivers in this coming draft, preferably Harrison Jr.. its going to cost a ton, but it doesnt matter, you need a top young receiver on the cheap and its now or never. every year Josh is getting older, and injuries do happen, more so when players start to age. go for it.
I was recently leaning towards taking who's there at 28 but your post reminded me Josh's prime is finite and perhaps half over.
That's a damn good argument to get him an elite receiver this draft and not take a bigger chance hoping Thomas or someone lower pans out.
But here's the thing:
EVERY MOVE HAS RISK.
If we take a rookie, there's a risk he busts or is merely average. That risk appears to be lower if we take a top-3 guy. But it's not guaranteed. Even Harrison could be merely very good and not great and thus not worth the capital expended.
If we sign/trade for a high-priced vet, there's a risk he doesn't perform as well or gets injured. And if he delivers, there's a risk he wants even more money and holds out. If a high-priced FA/traded player delivers, there is a risk associated with having less cap money to spend on other positions so we have to take a risk a lower-cost FA or a rookie will be high impact on the D line or at safety or wherever.You can argue that you diversify the risk by having multiple good players instead of one player you hope will be elite.
There's no such thing as no risk but where do we want to mitigate that risk the most?
I don't have the answer but you're right in that we need to set up Allen for the second half of his prime — and that entails working with risk and how to mitigate that element. I have to hope Beane makes the right call here.-
1
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, nosejob said:
I would target the Steelers at 20. I'm trading a 2025 2nd (likely from Minn.) to...
swap 28 for 20
swap 60 for 51
receive pick 84
If BT is there, great, if he's gone take Latu. No way he gets to 28.
BTJR at 20 Sweat at 51 or Latu and move up in the 2nd for WR
This sounds like a haul for the Bills. You sure a 2025 2nd will get us to move up 8 in the first, 9 in the 2nd, and a third rounder?
-
1
-
-
On 4/12/2024 at 4:52 PM, ndirish1978 said:
The Pass catching Depth chart will be
- Dalton Kincaid
- Shakir
- Curtis S
- James Cook
- Rookie
- Rookie
- Dawson Knox
Unless there is a major trade up, which I don't expect. This is what we're going to run with this year.
Cook is a good pass-catching back but he had 445 receiving yards in 2023.
I will give you 2 to 1 odds up to $100 on your end (I'll pay $200) that if we draft a rookie and that rookie plays at least 14 games (meaning, not injured more than 3 games) that the rookie passes Cook.
Our drafted WR will likely get 600 to 800 yards. If you think I'm high, let's have a bet. I'll do $10, whatever you like up to $100 on your end. -
5 minutes ago, HappyDays said:
I think you end up having an incredible rotation of weapons, the rookies don't have to be forced into a full time role, and we have enough weapons to make do even if one of them suffers an injury. I don't worry nearly as much as some fans do about snap count and target share. A deep stable of weapons is a good thing no matter how you swing it.
That might be the key to it.
I think it could be a good idea but it means not taking someone early for the D line. I think that could be a priority. Whatever happens, should be interesting... -
1 hour ago, HappyDays said:
I would actually rather get two freaks at WR. Shoot for the moon. In my mind I've decided the most exciting pair would be Xavier Legette and Xavier Worthy. Trust that putting two freaks on the field with a freak QB will lead to explosive results. There might be rough patches at first, but hopefully by the time the playoffs roll around we would have an offense that could attack literally any spot on the field.
Interesting idea.
However, who do you take off the field to play Legette and Worthy? Kincaid stays. Cook will be on most of the time.
Do you sit Samuel (3 years, $24 million with $15 million guaranteed) and use him as depth?
Or do you not play Shakir who had a good year in the slot last year?
My thinking is to sit Shakir. Some might think that's a waste of young drafted talent. Others might point to his historically short arms and say his ceiling is limited anyway.
What say you? -
58 and 60 are almost a wash. So this trade is about trading down 13 spots from 28 to 41 for the extra 88 pick.
If there's a guy you really like at 28, don't risk it; pull the trigger. If there's no one you're excited about, do it.
But I imagine Legette and maybe a couple other guys might be there and it's not worth it.-
1
-
-
I don't think "worse" receivers is a good plan but not having an elite number one but having three very good weapons helps diversify the attack, keeps Josh from trying to force it to someone, and that's a more sustainable model.
If an elite guy wants top dollar or becomes a locker room issue or distraction, he's likely going to get it or force a move, and perhaps a trade without fair compensation for the seller. And he's harder to replace.If one of three good to very good players wants an unreasonable or untenable raise, trade him and it's easier to replace him as there are more good/very good guys available than elite ones, of course.
This isn't a mandate to get "worse," just an acceptance that not having a top-3 receiver can still mean we've got a strong and sustainable WR room.-
1
-
-
Not worried. We may have a top-5 tight end at some point in the season. Samuels and Shakir are decent in their roles. We have a Cook who will be better catching this year, I'm calling it (productive college career backs this up) and Knox. Draft a traits guy in the first or second and we'll be ok.
-
2 minutes ago, mannc said:
That’s not what my eyes tell me…
Sometimes people just find ways to make themselves look bigger.
-
2
-
-
Marino's latest podcast offers compelling reasons to not freak out if the Bills take a higher-graded D prospect in the first and then take a WR in the 2nd.
He points to Green Bay and other examples of good WR rooms and players that didn't involve a first rounder.
Sorry, if already posted in this thread but here it is (again) and it's a good listen:
-
1
-
-
I don't do Twitter much... So Steph "Liked" that comment?
-
I'd love to have a couple beers with Fitz. Steph, well, my first instinct is no way, but upon further thought, it could be very, very interesting hearing him spout off.
But Fitz is the best guy.-
3
-
-
The good news is we will have to wait at least three more years till whatever WR we draft has an oversized ego and follows in Steph's path!
Cherish the next 1000 days or so! -
Lately, I've been guessing that we're targeting Thomas with a small trade-up, or Mitchell at 28, or very close to it.
But interesting that Joe Marino prefers Legette to Thomas. So does @GunnerBillSo many of us may not have our expectations fulfilled. The cover 1 podcast with Marino made the point that the media mock drafts and thus fan rankings are often, way, way off from the boards teams have.
-
2
-
-
Elite regular season player. Perhaps he's on a slow decline, perhaps he still has one more elite regular season (or first season half ) in him.
However with 65 yards total in last 3 playoff games, I don't think he's a money post-season player.
That's what the Bills need: a player in the playoffs who will be bracketed and who will still get 80, 100, 120 yards in a game, and make clutch grabs in the 4th quarter, the last 2 minutes, and OT if we go there.-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, Pine Barrens Mafia said:
Oh wait you're serious? 😄😄
Yes, I am serious.
Oliver had 9.5 sacks and the sixth-best pressure rate (13.3%) at his position, per Next Gen Stats (minimum 300 pass rushes).
Why is idea that Ed is an impact player so funny to you?-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Low Positive said:
It should be Diggs and picks traded for picks
No, it's not. (And I made this point days ago.) We received a SINGLE pick.
So Diggs and picks were traded for a PICK. Singular. One pick. That's it. Many picks were involved but Diggs and other capital was traded FOR a single pick.
-
2
-
-
13 hours ago, BRH said:
I was just thinking about that this morning. His HOF candidacy will now turn on whatever he's able to do in Houston and/or wherever he goes after next year. If he lasts another five years and doesn't win anything, he'll probably get in as a compiler after having to wait awhile. He has had exactly one memorable positive playoff moment (and it wasn't in Buffalo), and it was a single play. Andre is seen as a compiler and had to wait a long time; he had seven Pro Bowls to Diggs' four, nine postseason TD catches to Diggs' four, at one point he had more Super Bowl receptions than any other WR, plus he had that three-TD second-half performance in the Comeback. Diggs gotta do some work if he wants to be seen on that level.
Andre Reed took forever to get in and he had over 13,000 yards, 87 TDs, and made 4 Super Bowls.
Right now DIggs has: almost 10,000 yards and 67 TDs and 0 SB appearances. Long way to go. I'd bet he's out of the league after 3 more seasons with declining stats due to age. He'll probably end up around 12,000 yards and 80 TDs. WIthout the the SB's that wouldn't be enough. But if he can hang on and play till his mid 30s, who knows.-
1
-
-
21 minutes ago, BobbyC81 said:
Interesting also that the WR needy Giants, with ex-Bills at GM and head coach didn’t trade for Diggs.
Yes, very interesting indeed.
-
2 hours ago, nosejob said:
I can see them moving up to 26, maybe 24 and getting Latu. Then start dealing.
I wouldn't argue but a lot of mocks now have him going much higher. We'll see...
-
Oliver can be.
-
1
-
1
-
2
-
1
-
-
As a person, I liked Morse a lot. Hyde was cool too.
As players, I think their careers are on the downside (Poyer, Diggs, Morse) or over (Hyde).-
3
-
-
2 hours ago, FireChans said:
?????
Diggs, Beasley, Brown, Davis, Singletary.
Shakir, Samuel, Hollins, Cook.
??????????????
It's really, really disingenuous of you to not list Kincaid there. You don't like Beane, I get it. I don't love him but I'd give him a B. Good but not great so far.
But for you to leave out Kincaid in the list of offensive weapons really says a lot.-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, FireChans said:
Are we very good? And did Beane really do much?
Who are the biggest contributors at the biggest position over the last 5 years? And how many of them were Pre-Beane?
Pre-Beane:
Tre
Dawkins
Milano
Hyde
Poyer
Post-Beane:
Allen
Edmunds
Taron Johnson
Diggs
Oliver
Davis
Rousseau ?
Cook?
Bernard?
Kincaid?
Torrence?
That list is kind of sobering. The Beane "stars" from 2018 to current day ain't really stars, outside of Allen and Diggs, maybe Oliver.
We feel exactly how we are supposed to about our team. We are a team whose best players were all acquired 4-7 years ago, and most of their careers have either faded or ended.
4 years ago, we had 3 All-Pro/ProBowlers in the secondary, and Taron Johnson was probably our 4th best DB. Today, he's our second best DB, narrowly beating out a 6th round pick out of Villanova.
4 years ago, Gabe Davis was our fourth best WR. Last year, he was our second best. And today, Shakir is our best WR by default.
3 years ago, our best EDGE player was probably Rousseau. Today, it's still Rousseau, by default.
Now a lot of our best players got old. That's not Beane's fault. But he is tasked with maintaining a talent pipeline to offset those losses. And he has failed, imo.
We have the 2nd-most wins in the league that past five years. If you think that's all Josh Allen, that's your prerogative. I think Allen is a huge reason but there are other teams with franchise QBs who haven't won that many games.
That, combined with the early playoff exits (though the best team in the league, KC, s a big reason why), counts as very good but not great to me. If you want to think we're mediocre, go ahead.
Best examples of failed 1st rounders who revived their careers?
in The Stadium Wall
Posted
People were talking about Ed Oliver like he was a bust and he came on strong and now people are saying he's outperformed his 4-year $68 million second contract.